Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1887-04-09
IS 1T A RAILROAD sCHEmEr

The Interstate Commerce law, 10
which the people of Nevada nave locked
with SO much interest as IL measure of
relief from the unjust determinations
Of tine Central Puciic Railroad in the
matter of freigbts, mas been the subject
of much thought, and we have arrived
ut the following conclusions:
First: That the Interstate Com
merce law is schems guttt n UP for the
especial benefit Of the great Trans Con-
uneutrl Railroads. Second: That the
great spcuch of Sen ttor stanford, de-
hveIed III the u. S. SrLate Jan 10, 1857,
ostenSibly against the measure WAS in
reality pant of the plot to induce the
Congress of the United Stat $, II mai ~
ity Of whose members nre not directly
interested in railroads, 10 work for the
passage OF the bill.
In support Of the first proposition it
is sufficient to offer Ill argument the fact
that the reports of the various railroads
show the loss of many thousands of dol
lars annually by the glnnting of pnsses
to those whose influence is desired by
the several companies, md whose op.
position they could not afforl to invoke
by revoking these passes without some
pretext. and that was apparently found
IN the provisions Of the bill in question,
though Ne desire TO state ms our candid
opinion That no Stute or Nation has the
right to, prohibit any PRISON, company,
or corporation from carrying any per-
son free of charge if they d sire soto
do. While the local freight rates re
main the same the railroads haze taken
advantage of the new law to increuse
through rates to twice or thrice the for
mer charges. and Nevada mere hunts
are compelled to pay II Inrge increase in
freights on goods ordered from cities
east of the Missouri river. These facts
show that the operation # the Inter
State Commerce law will add millions
of dollars Annually to the nlrea ly pie
thoric cttf,rs Of the rail! onds. In sup
port Of the second proposition We quote
from the speech of Senator Stanford,
above referred to, in which the Senator
says:
"Tbe Southern Pncfic strides the
Atlantic waters Mt II much less distance
than amy of its more northern COMPETE
tors. 1t has IL line OF easy grab. MT -,
comparatively, and it completes not only
With Its northern rivals, bnt more lar
I'll ahlly with the Cnpe Horn and 18TH.
mus OF Panama rOuts, hecau,c Of it's
shorter line and easier gradients. In
this competition it often takes freight
between the two. oceans us low as $40,
while ii tnkes freight half way for, say.
$40 n tOn-a most reasonable SUN for
the limited local business of that cuun
try. Now, if it only makes 81 net on
the freight from San Francisco to New
Orleans ut $40, it is glad to make that
one dollar where it cannot make more
bue ton of freight going to LII PaSo,
somS1hng over half the distance. will
pny $50. Now. if the freight nt SO n
ton to New Orleans phys 81 profit, the
freight going less distance to El Puso
would pny as much profit ns twcuty-nne
tons going through to New Orleans"
1t has been n subject of wonder why
the Senator should Use such IN argu-
ment i'll speech in opposition to the
BILL. but recent developments Lead to
the conclusion TINT this statement of the
gross injustice prncticed by the South.
eEn PnciGc Company, made by one
whose knowledge Of railroad matters
will not be questioned by anyone, was
q part Of the plot to secure the pnssnge
of the bill. These fucts lend TO the con.
clucion' that the Interstate Commcrc.
bill was eoncected in the interest OF the
r"ilroads, and passed into law with
the consent of the raiIroad nagnates
who for effect offered feeble and
ephemeral resistance 10 it's passage.
Will anyone contend that the iudi.
cious expenditure of ono or two millions
OF dollars would not have defeated the
OIL in question: Had the railroads